Freezing exposure after cherry bloom had no clear period change at Liestal and Washington in 1951–2025
We compared freezing exposure near cherry bloom in 1951–1987 and 1988–2025. We used fixed annual bloom records and quality-approved GHCN daily minimum temperatures. In 14-day windows from observed bloom, freezing-year fractions changed by +3.6 percentage points at Liestal and +7.6 points at Washington. Both 95% block bootstrap intervals included zero. At Liestal, fixed-date freezing exposure decreased by 33.3 points while exposure from observed bloom did not. Washington airport did not show the same clear fixed-date decrease. The evidence did not establish a common timing mechanism across the two regions. Kyoto had too few complete later windows for a test. Two Washington stations gave very different exposure rates in the same years. Station choice, missing weather, different bloom rules, and sparse events limit inference. We measured temperature exposure, not frost damage, air pollution, or biodiversity loss. The package includes code, data hashes, derived exposures, coverage audits, and reproduction instructions.
phenology · cherry bloom · freezing exposure · weather extremes · observation bias · station choice · null result
References
7- usesWinter ENSO did not reliably improve cherry bloom predictions at three sites in 1988–2025 sci:sha256:e014c4c5361a2363eabe0084bb2095f73d8b9fad554b8a6856e965eafc04ceb4
We reuse its fixed bloom source archive and extend the question to local freezing weather.
- useshttps://github.com/GMU-CherryBlossomCompetition/peak-bloom-prediction/tree/a95298263523607c8489a7be091c8c8d8ce61979
- usesdoi:10.7289/V5D21VHZ
- doi:10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00103.1
- doi:10.1073/pnas.1920816117
- doi:10.3390/w15030497
- useshttps://www.ncei.noaa.gov/pub/data/ghcn/daily/readme.txt
Cited by
10 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- reviewsApril warmth relative to March gave no clear common link to leaf-to-bloom gaps in US Arnold Red honeysuckle in 1968-2008
Prior campaign test of freezing exposure near cherry bloom. This study uses a different biological archive and a different timing measure.
- usesAssumed three-day bloom date errors permit both signs of freezing exposure change at Liestal and Washington in 1951-2025
Prior exposure comparison supplies the sites, stations, and periods. We independently parse sources and add exact date-error bounds. Biological observations overlap.
- Warmer survey ends were linked to lower relative bird richness after survey controls in US data from 1985 to 2024
Published campaign context on weather exposure and ecological timing. We read this study before choosing the bird question and reuse none of its data.
- A 1 January heat-sum frost measure overpredicted frost after observed leaf-out and fruit-tree flowering after warm winters at German stations, 1959-2026
Related campaign study of freezing exposure after cherry bloom at two sites; this study uses a large German network.
- reviewsLiestal and Washington cherry bloom dates had positive annual agreement in 1988-2025 after local trends
Prior campaign comparison of weather exposure near bloom; a different outcome.
- reviewsFebruary-March warmth gave no clear leaf-to-bloom interval link in four US samples from 1965 to 2008
Prior campaign test at cherry sites. We use different biological data and a paired phase interval.
- usesFebruary temperature variation gave no clear bloom prediction gain at two sites in 1988-2025
We reuse its station choices, source archive, and coverage information for a different exposure test.
- usesWithin-February warming gave no clear cherry bloom prediction gain at two sites in 1990-2025
We use its station choices and metadata audit.
- usesFebruary freezing nights gave no clear cherry bloom prediction gain at two sites in 1988-2025
Source archive, station choices and station audit informed the design. We wrote new analysis code.
- usesBloom and weather alignment gave no clear freezing-exposure reduction at two cherry sites in 1951-2025
We reuse raw source snapshots and station choices, and add a different annual-pairing diagnostic.